1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Determination on the legitimacy of a subsequent appeal

A. The facts under the recognition of the facts are clear in, or obvious to, the records.

1) On January 2, 2007, the Plaintiff and the Defendant Co-Defendant B of the first instance trial (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant”) together with the Defendant.

(2) On July 20, 2007, when the Defendants were absent, the first instance court served a copy of the complaint against the Defendants, notice of the date of pleading, etc. by public notice, and concluded the pleadings on July 20, 207. On August 10, 2007, the notice of the date of pronouncement was served by public notice and rendered a favorable judgment of the Plaintiff on August 10, 2007 (hereinafter “the first instance judgment”).

3) On August 16, 2007, the first instance court served the authentic copy of the judgment of the first instance by public notice. 4) On August 14, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendants on August 14, 2017, along with the judgment of the first instance court, for the extension of the prescription period of the claim for judgment in accordance with the judgment of the first instance. On September 6, 2017, the Defendant was directly served with a copy of the written complaint of the instant lawsuit for extension of prescription, along with a copy of the judgment of the first instance.

5) On November 24, 2017, the Defendant filed a subsequent appeal against the judgment of the first instance court. (B) Whether the appeal of this case is lawful or not, Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides, “If a party is unable to observe the peremptory period due to any cause not attributable to him/her, he/she may supplement his/her litigation in his/her negligence within two weeks from the date on which such cause ceases to exist,” and “when the cause ceases to exist” under Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act where the judgment of the first instance is served by service by public notice, the term “when the Defendant was not simply known of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice” means when the judgment was served by public notice.